Skip to content
Digital Green Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Digital Green Foundation

Digital green is creating a world where farmers use technology and data to build prosperous communities.

$2.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$247k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$6.8MEnvironment$419kInternational$402kCommunity Improvement$40kPhilanthropy$7k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $320,065, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,722,663 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,402,598 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $313k
$66,415
Median grant
3
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRECISION DEVELOPMENT$246,650
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE$66,415
ONE ACRE FUND$7,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 67% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%DIMAGI INC: $185k → 8%JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUE INC: $69k → 16%IDEOORG: $150k → 8%IDEOORG: $50k → 10%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $76k → 16%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $198k → 17%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $1.1M → 14%DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS: $12k → 13%CARE: $135k → 13%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $7k → 9%ONE ACRE FUND: $118k → 8%COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT NETWORK: $40k → 19%DIMAGI INC: $57k → 8%JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUE INC: $65k → 16%IDEOORG: $50k → 8%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $53k → 16%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $81k → 17%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $541k → 14%CARE: $105k → 13%ONE ACRE FUND: $36k → 8%PRECISION DEVELOPMENT: $636k → 8%JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $12k → 16%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $521k → 14%CARE: $102k → 13%ONE ACRE FUND: $7k → 8%PRECISION DEVELOPMENT: $588k → 8%PRECISION AGRICULTURE FOR DEVELOPMENT: $642k → 16%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $345k → 14%CARE: $18k → 13%PRECISION DEVELOPMENT: $452k → 8%PRECISION AGRICULTURE FOR DEVELOPMENT: $190k → 16%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $260k → 14%PRECISION DEVELOPMENT: $247k → 8%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $197k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $121k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $111k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $66k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
CA
CO
MD
NC
DC
GA

Grants abroad, by region: $2.4M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South Asia$2.3M · 96% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: COMMUNITY VIDEO, DEVELOPMENT & USE OF DIGITAL TOOLS TO STRENGTHEN FARMER GROUPS AND IMPROVE ACCESS TO LOCALIZED ADVISORY INFORMATION & AG SERVICE PROVIDERS TO IMPROVE AG LIVELIHOODS AND NUTRITION OUTCOMES, INDIA · IMPROVE THE LIVELIHOODS AND RESILIENCE OF SMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN INDIA. THIS IS ACHIEVED BY DEVELOPING AND DEMONSTRATING A MODEL THAT COMBINES DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY AND TRAINING TO ADVANCE THE GROWTH OF EFFICIENT AND INCLUSIVE FARMER PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS (FPOS), INDIA

Sub-Saharan Africa$94k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TRAINING COMMUNITY GROUPS & FARMERS: PARTICIPATORY LAND USE PLANNING, FOREST MANAGEMENT & RESTORATION, SUSTAINABLE COFFEE FARMING, ETHIOPIA

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 44% of Digital Green Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Digital Green Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 69% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.6M · 9 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
3

Total granted

$7.6M
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+203%

Still filing today

89%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalFood & NutritionEnvironmentEducationCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • PD
    PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.8M · revenue +65%
  • COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $359k · revenue +36%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    2× · 2023–2024 · $278k · revenue +79%

Funded once

  • CD
    COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT NETWORK
    one grant, 2017 · $40k
  • DD
    DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
  • MI
    Meridian Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue +203%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
2
International Budget Partnership

Ibp works with civil society, governments, international institutions and the private sector to bring about a world in which empowered citizens participate in open, inclusive public budgeting processes to shape policies and practices that…

International
3
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
4
Institute for Energy Research

The institute for energy research (ier) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. ier maintains that freely functioning…

Environment
5
International Republican Institute

Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.

Education
6
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
7
Middle East Investment Initiative Inc

Middle east investment initiative, inc. (meii) stimulates sustainable economic activity and long-lasting job creation in the middle east and north africa (mena) by designing and deploying finance and technical assistance programs to…

Community Improvement
8
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
9
Fielding Graduate University

We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.

—
10
Center for Global Development

Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…

Human Services
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Food Policy Research Institute; the most unlike its peers is Cornell University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 12 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,755,538 · InternationalPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INCCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $359,097 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE…ONE ACRE FUND: $160,816 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $3,249,796 · Food & NutritionINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTEDIMAGI INC: $242,209 · OtherJSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $145,002 · OtherCOLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT NETWORK: $39,888 · Other+1 more: $12,175 · OtherENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $278,446 · EnvironmentIDEOORG: $250,000 · Community ImprovementCornell University: $128,578 · EducationMeridian Institute: $7,114 · Philanthropy
International$3,275,451Food & Nutrition$3,249,796Other$439,274Environment$278,446Community Improvement$250,000Education$128,578Philanthropy$7,114

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $3,249,796 over 9y, 0.8% of budgetPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,755,538 over 6y, 11% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $359,097 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $278,446 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIDEOORG: $250,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetONE ACRE FUND: $160,816 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $145,002 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University: $128,578 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMeridian Institute: $7,114 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Gates FoundationFamily Health Interna…Fidelity Investments …
Gates FoundationWA15.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Family Health International Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Digital Green Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Digital Green Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 69%
  • Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc: 69% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Digital Green Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Digital Green Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 12 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Digital Green’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home